Right-libertarianism

Right-libertarianism,[1][2][3][4][5] also known as libertarian capitalism[6] or right-wing libertarianism,[1][7] is a political philosophy and type of libertarianism that supports capitalist property rights and defends market distribution of natural resources and private property.[8] The term "right-libertarianism" is used to distinguish this class of views on the nature of property and capital[9] from left-libertarianism, a type of libertarianism that combines self-ownership with an egalitarian approach to natural resources.[10] In contrast to socialist libertarianism,[4] right-libertarianism supports free-market capitalism.[1] Like most forms of libertarianism, it supports civil liberties,[1] especially natural law,[11] negative rights[12] and a major reversal of the modern welfare state.[13]

This article is about the type of libertarianism supporting capitalism and private ownership of natural resources. For the ideology combining conservatism with libertarianism, or representing the conservative wing of libertarianism, see Libertarian conservatism. For the type of libertarianism supporting conservative social policies, see Paleolibertarianism.
Part of a series on
Liberalism
  • Liberalism portal
  • Politics portal
Part of the Politics series on
Neoliberalism
  • Capitalism portal
  • Economics portal
  • Politics portal

Like libertarians of all varieties, right-libertarians refer to themselves simply as "libertarians".[2][3][7] Being the most common type of libertarianism in the United States,[4] right-libertarianism has become the most common referent of "libertarianism"[14][15] there since the late 20th century while historically and elsewhere[16][17][18][19][20][21] it continues to be widely used to refer to anti-state forms of socialism such as anarchism[22][23][24][25] and more generally libertarian communism/libertarian Marxism and libertarian socialism.[16][26] Around the time of Murray Rothbard, who popularized the term "libertarian" in the United States during the 1960s, anarcho-capitalist movements started calling themselves "libertarian", leading to the rise of the term "right-libertarian" to distinguish them. Rothbard himself acknowledged the co-opting of the term and boasted of its "capture [...] from the enemy".[16]

Right-libertarian political thought is characterized by the strict priority given to liberty, with the need to maximize the realm of individual freedom and minimize the scope of public authority.[27] Right-libertarians typically see the state as the principal threat to liberty. This anti-statism differs from anarchist doctrines in that it is based upon an uncompromising individualism that places little or no emphasis upon human sociability or cooperation.[2][27][28] Right-libertarian philosophy is also rooted in the ideas of individual rights and laissez-faire economics. The right-libertarian theory of individual rights generally stresses self-ownership and that people have an absolute entitlement to the property that their labor produces.[27] Economically, right-libertarians make no distinction between capitalism and free markets and view any attempt to dictate the market process as counterproductive, emphasizing the mechanisms and self-regulating nature of the market whilst portraying government intervention and attempts to redistribute wealth as invariably unnecessary and counter-productive.[27] Although all right-libertarians oppose government intervention, there is a division between anarcho-capitalists, who view the state as an unnecessary evil and want property rights protected without statutory law through market-generated tort, contract and property law; and minarchists, who recognize the necessary need for a minimal state, often referred to as a night-watchman state, to provide its citizens with courts, the military and the police.[3]

While influenced by classical liberal thought, with some viewing right-libertarianism as an outgrowth or as a variant of it,[29] there are significant differences. Edwin van de Haar argues that "confusingly, in the United States the term libertarianism is sometimes also used for or by classical liberals. But this erroneously masks the differences between them".[30] Classical liberalism refuses to give priority to liberty over order and therefore does not exhibit the hostility to the state which is the defining feature of libertarianism.[27] As such, right-libertarians believe classical liberals favor too much state involvement,[31] arguing that they do not have enough respect for individual property rights and lack sufficient trust in the workings of the free market and its spontaneous order leading to support of a much larger state.[31] Right-libertarians also disagree with classical liberals as being too supportive of central banks and monetarist policies.[32]

Definition
See also: Definition of anarchism and libertarianism
An economic group diagram in which right-libertarianism falls within libertarian capitalism as right-libertarians oppose state capitalism, supporting instead laissez-faire economics within capitalism

People described as being "left-libertarian" or "right-libertarian" generally tend to call themselves simply "libertarians" and refer to their philosophy as "libertarianism". As a result, some authors and political scientists classify the forms of libertarianism into two groups,[33][34] namely left-libertarianism and right-libertarianism,[1][2][3][4][7] to distinguish libertarian views on the nature of property and capital.[9]

Traditionally, "libertarian" was a term coined by the French libertarian communist Joseph Déjacque[22][23][35][36][37] to mean a form of left-wing politics that has been frequently used to refer to anarchism[2][18][22][23] and libertarian socialism[20] since the mid- to late 19th century.[24][25] With the modern development of right-libertarian ideologies such as anarcho-capitalism and minarchism co-opting[16][17][19] the term "libertarian" in the mid-20th century to instead advocate laissez-faire capitalism and strong private property rights such as in land, infrastructure and natural resources,[38] the terms "left-libertarianism" and "right-libertarianism" have been used more often as to differentiate between the two.[2][3] Socialist libertarianism[39] has been included within a broad left-libertarianism[40][41][42] while right-libertarianism mainly refers to laissez-faire capitalism such as Murray Rothbard's anarcho-capitalism and Robert Nozick's minarchism.[2][3][7]

Right-libertarianism has been described as combining individual freedom and opposition to the state, with strong support for free markets and private property. Property rights have been the issue that has divided libertarian philosophies. According to Jennifer Carlson, right-libertarianism is the dominant form of libertarianism in the United States. Right-libertarians "see strong private property rights as the basis for freedom and thus are—to quote the title of Brian Doherty's text on libertarianism in the United States—"radicals for capitalism".[4]

Herbert Kitschelt and Anthony J. McGann contrast right-libertarianism—"a strategy that combines pro-market positions with opposition to hierarchical authority, support of unconventional political participation, and endorsement of feminism and of environmentalism"—with right-authoritarianism.[43][44]

Mark Bevir holds that there are three types of libertarianism, namely left, right and consequentialist libertarianism as promoted by Friedrich Hayek.[45]

The Nolan Chart

According to contemporary American libertarian Walter Block, left-libertarians and right-libertarians agree with certain libertarian premises, but "where [they] differ is in terms of the logical implications of these founding axioms".[46] Although some libertarians may reject the political spectrum, especially the left–right political spectrum,[1][47][48][49][50] right-libertarianism and several right-oriented strands of libertarianism in the United States have been described as being right-wing,[51] New Right[52][53] or radical right[43][44] and reactionary.[13][54]

American libertarian activist and politician David Nolan, the principal founder of the Libertarian Party, developed what is now known as the Nolan Chart to replace the traditional left–right political spectrum. The Nolan Chart has been used by several modern American libertarians and right-libertarians who reject the traditional political spectrum for its lack of inclusivity and see themselves as north-of-center. It is used in an effort to quantify typical libertarian views that support both free markets and social liberties and reject what they see as restrictions on economic and personal freedom imposed by the left and the right, respectively,[55] although this later point has been criticized.[56] Other libertarians reject the separation of personal and economic liberty, or that the Nolan Chart gives no weight to foreign policy.[57]

Since the resurgence of neoliberalism in the 1970s, right-libertarianism has spread beyond North America via think tanks and political parties.[58][59] In the United States, libertarianism is increasingly viewed as this capitalist free-market position.[60][61]

Terminology

As a term, "right-libertarianism" is used by some political analysts, academics and media sources, especially in the United States, to describe the libertarian philosophy which is supportive of free-market capitalism and strong private property rights, in addition to supporting limited government and self-ownership,[62] being contrasted with left-wing views which do not support the former. In most of the world, this particular political position is mostly known as classical liberalism, economic liberalism and neoliberalism.[63] It is mainly associated with right-wing politics, support for free markets and private ownership of capital goods. Furthermore, it is usually contrasted with similar ideologies such as social democracy and social liberalism which generally favor alternative forms of capitalism such as mixed economies, state capitalism and welfare capitalism.[64][65]

Peter Vallentyne writes that libertarianism, defined as being about self-ownership, is not a right-wing doctrine in the context of the typical left–right political spectrum because on social issues it tends to be left-wing, opposing laws restricting consensual sexual relationships between or drug use by adults as well as laws imposing religious views or practices and compulsory military service. He defines right-libertarianism as holding that unowned natural resources "may be appropriated by the first person who discovers them, mixes her labor with them, or merely claims them—without the consent of others, and with little or no payment to them". He contrasts this with left-libertarianism, where such "unappropriated natural resources belong to everyone in some egalitarian manner".[15] Similarly, Charlotte and Lawrence Becker maintain that right-libertarianism most often refers to the political position that because natural resources are originally unowned, they may be appropriated at-will by private parties without the consent of, or owing to, others.[66]

Samuel Edward Konkin III, who characterized agorism as a form of left-libertarianism[67][68] and strategic branch of left-wing market anarchism,[69] defined right-libertarianism as an "activist, organization, publication or tendency which supports parliamentarianism exclusively as a strategy for reducing or abolishing the state, typically opposes Counter-Economics, either opposes the Libertarian Party or works to drag it right and prefers coalitions with supposedly 'free-market' conservatives".[70]

Anthony Gregory maintains that libertarianism "can refer to any number of varying and at times mutually exclusive political orientations". While holding that the important distinction for libertarians is not left or right, but whether they are "government apologists who use libertarian rhetoric to defend state aggression", he describes right-libertarianism as having and maintaining interest in economic freedom, preferring a conservative lifestyle, viewing private business as a "great victim of the state" and favoring a non-interventionist foreign policy, sharing the Old Right's "opposition to empire".[71]

While the defining characteristic of some kinds of right-libertarianism is cultural or social conservatism, Kevin Carson has coined the term "vulgar libertarianism" to describe a different variety of "right-libertarianism", one which involves the use of libertarian rhetoric in capitalist apologetics. Carson uses "vulgar libertarianism" to refer to the use of talk about what could be expected in a genuinely free market to justify some or all of "actually existing capitalism" which according to Carson is distorted by state-secured privilege and lacks many of the defining features of a free market. Carson derives this phrase from Karl Marx's "vulgar political economy", a style of economic reasoning that "deliberately becomes increasingly apologetic and makes strenuous attempts to talk out of existence the ideas which contain the contradictions [evident in economic life]".[72] Carson treats "vulgar libertarianism" as a tendency within much right-libertarian writing rather than a category into which any figure could be thought to fit on all occasions. He has claimed to find it in the work of such authors as Eamonn Butler and Madsen Pirie of the Adam Smith Institute as well as on occasion the writings of others including Radley Balko, Milton Friedman and Ludwig von Mises.[73]

Old Right
See also: Old Right (United States)

Murray Rothbard, whose writings and personal influence helped create some strands of right-libertarianism,[74] wrote about the Old Right in the United States, a loose coalition of individuals formed in the 1930s to oppose the New Deal at home and military interventionism abroad. He wrote that they "did not describe or think of themselves as conservatives: they wanted to repeal and overthrow, not conserve".[75] Bill Kauffman has also written about such "old right libertarians".[76]

Individuals who are seen in this Old Right libertarian tradition[75][77][78] include Frank Chodorov,[79][80] John T. Flynn,[81][82] Garet Garrett,[83][84] Rose Wilder Lane,[85][86] H. L. Mencken,[87] Albert Jay Nock[88][89][90] and Isabel Paterson.[91][92] What those thinkers had in common was opposition to the rise of the managerial state during the Progressive Era and its expansion in connection with the New Deal and the Fair Deal whilst challenging imperialism and military interventionism.[93] However, "Old Right" was a label about which many or most of these figures might have been skeptical as most thought of themselves effectively as classical liberals rather than the national defense and social conservatism of thinkers associated with the later movement conservatism, with Chodorov famously writing: "As for me, I will punch anyone who calls me a conservative in the nose. I am a radical".[94][95][96] Their opposition and resistance to the state approached philosophical anarchism with Nock and amounted to statelessness in Chodorov's case.[76] On the other hand, Lew Rockwell and Jeffrey Tucker identifies the Old Right as being culturally conservative, arguing that "[v]igorous social authority—as embodied in the family, church, and other mediating institutions—is a bedrock of the virtuous society" and that "[t]he egalitarian ethic is morally reprehensible and destructive of private property and social authority".[97]

In the 1960s, Rothbard started publishing Left and Right: A Journal of Libertarian Thought, believing that the left–right political spectrum had gone "entirely askew" since conservatives were sometimes more statist than liberals and tried to reach out to leftists and go beyond left and right.[98] In 1971, Rothbard wrote about right-libertarianism which he described as supporting free trade, property rights and self-ownership.[1] He would later describe it as anarcho-capitalism[99][100][101] and paleolibertarianism.[102][103]

Philosophy
Part of a series on
Libertarianism
in the United States
  • Libertarianism portal
  • Liberalism portal

Right-libertarianism developed in the United States in the mid-20th century from the works of European liberal writers like John Locke, Friedrich Hayek and Ludwig von Mises and is the most popular conception of libertarianism in the United States today.[4][104] It is commonly referred to as a continuation or radicalization of classical liberalism.[105][106] The most important of these early right-libertarian philosophers were modern American libertarians such as Robert Nozick and Murray Rothbard.[2]

Although often sharing the left-libertarian advocacy for social freedom, right-libertarians also value the social institutions that enforce conditions of capitalism while rejecting institutions that function in opposition to these on the grounds that such interventions represent unnecessary coercion of individuals and abrogation of their economic freedom.[107] Anarcho-capitalists[108][109] seek complete elimination of the state in favor of private defense agencies while minarchists defend night-watchman states which maintain only those functions of government necessary to safeguard natural rights, understood in terms of self-ownership or autonomy.[110]

Right-libertarians are economic liberals of either the Austrian School (majority) or the Chicago school of economics (minority) and support laissez-faire capitalism which they define as the free market in opposition to state capitalism and interventionism.[111]

Right-libertarianism and its individualism have been discussed as part of the New Right in relation to neoliberalism and Thatcherism.[53] In the 20th century, New Right liberal conservatism influenced by right-libertarianism marginalized other forms of conservatism.[112]

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy describes right-libertarian philosophy as follows:

Libertarianism is often thought of as 'right-wing' doctrine. This, however, is mistaken for at least two reasons. First, on social—rather than economic—issues, libertarianism tends to be 'left-wing'. It opposes laws that restrict consensual and private sexual relationships between adults (e.g., gay sex, non-marital sex, and deviant sex), laws that restrict drug use, laws that impose religious views or practices on individuals, and compulsory military service. Second, in addition to the better-known version of libertarianism—right-libertarianism—there is also a version known as 'left-libertarianism'. Both endorse full self-ownership, but they differ with respect to the powers agents have to appropriate unappropriated natural resources (land, air, water, etc.).[15]

Right-libertarians are distinguished from the dominant libertarian tradition by their relation to property and capital. While both libertarianism and right-libertarianism share general antipathy towards power by government authority, the latter exempts power wielded through free-market capitalism. Historically, libertarians such as Herbert Spencer and Max Stirner supported the protection of an individual's freedom from powers of government and private ownership. While condemning governmental encroachment on personal liberties, right-libertarians support freedoms on the basis of their agreement with private property rights and the abolishment of public amenities is a common theme in right-libertarian writings.[9][113]

While associated with free-market capitalism, right-libertarianism is not opposed in principle to voluntary egalitarianism and socialism.[114][115] However, right-libertarians believe that their advocated economic system would prove superior and that people would prefer it to socialism.[116][117] For Nozick, it does not imply support of capitalism, but merely that capitalism is compatible with libertarianism,[118] something which is rejected by anti-capitalist libertarians.[119][120][121][122]

According to Stephen Metcalf, Nozick expressed serious misgivings about capitalism, going so far as to reject much of the foundations of the theory on the grounds that personal freedom can sometimes only be fully actualized via a collectivist politics and that wealth is at times justly redistributed via taxation to protect the freedom of the many from the potential tyranny of an overly selfish and powerful few.[123] Nozick suggested that citizens who are opposed to wealth redistribution which fund programs they object to should be able to opt out by supporting alternative government approved charities with an added 5% surcharge.[124] Nonetheless, Nozick did not stop from self-identifying as a libertarian in a broad sense[125] and Julian Sanchez has argued that his views simply became more nuanced.[126]

Non-aggression principle
Main article: Non-aggression principle

The non-aggression principle (NAP) is often described as the foundation of several present-day libertarian philosophies, including right-libertarianism.[127][128][129][130][131] The NAP is a moral stance which forbids actions that are inconsistent with capitalist private property and property rights. It defines aggression and initiation of force as violation of these rights. The NAP and property rights are closely linked since what constitutes aggression depends on what it is considered to be one's property.[132]

While the principle has been used rhetorically to oppose policies such as military drafts, taxation and victimless crime laws, use of the NAP as a justification for right-libertarianism has been criticized as circular reasoning and as a rhetorical obfuscation of the coercive nature of right-libertarian property law enforcement because the principle redefines aggression in their own terms.[133][134][135][136][137][138][139]

Property rights
Main article: Property rights (economics)

While there is debate on whether right-libertarianism and left-libertarianism or socialist libertarianism "represent distinct ideologies as opposed to variations on a theme", right-libertarianism is most in favor of capitalist private property and property rights.[140] Right-libertarians maintain that unowned natural resources "may be appropriated by the first person who discovers them, mixes his labor with them, or merely claims them—without the consent of others, and with little or no payment to them". This contrasts with left-libertarianism in which "unappropriated natural resources belong to everyone in some egalitarian manner".[141] Right-libertarians believe that natural resources are originally unowned and therefore private parties may appropriate them at will without the consent of, or owing to, others (e.g. a land value tax).[142]

Right-libertarians are also referred to as propertarians because they hold that societies in which private property rights are enforced are the only ones that are both ethical and lead to the best possible outcomes.[143] They generally support free-market capitalism and are not opposed to any concentrations of economic power, provided it occurs through non-coercive means.[144] This has been criticized because "the holders of large amounts of property have great power to dictate the terms upon which others work for them and thus in effect the power to "force" others to be resources for them".[6]

State
Main articles: Anarcho-capitalism and Night-watchman state
Anarchy, State, and Utopia (1974), a book by philosopher Robert Nozick arguing for a minimal state

There is a debate amongst right-libertarians as to whether or not the state is legitimate. While anarcho-capitalists advocate its abolition, minarchists support minimal states, often referred to as night-watchman states. Minarchists maintain that the state is necessary for the protection of individuals from aggression, breach of contract, fraud and theft. They believe the only legitimate governmental institutions are courts, military and police, although some expand this list to include the executive and legislative branches, fire departments and prisons. These minarchists justify the state on the grounds that it is the logical consequence of adhering to the non-aggression principle.[145][146][147] Some minarchists argue that a state is inevitable, believing anarchy to be futile.[148] Others argue that anarchy is immoral because it implies that the non-aggression principle is optional and not sufficient to enforce the non-aggression principle because the enforcement of laws under anarchy is open to competition.[149] Another common justification is that private defense agencies and court firms would tend to represent the interests of those who pay them enough.[150]

Right-libertarians such as anarcho-capitalists argue that the state violates the non-aggression principle by its nature because governments use force against those who have not stolen or vandalized private property, assaulted anyone, or committed fraud.[151][152] Others argue that monopolies tend to be corrupt and inefficient and that private defense and court agencies would have to have a good reputation in order to stay in business. Linda and Morris Tannehill argue that no coercive monopoly of force can arise on a truly free market and that a government's citizenry can desert them in favor of a competent protection and defense agency.[153]

Philosopher Moshe Kroy argues that the disagreement between anarcho-capitalists who adhere to Murray Rothbard's view of human consciousness and the nature of values and minarchists who adhere to Ayn Rand's view of human consciousness and the nature of values over whether or not the state is moral is not due to a disagreement over the correct interpretation of a mutually held ethical stance. He argues that the disagreement between these two groups is instead the result of their disagreement over the nature of human consciousness and that each group is making the correct interpretation of their differing premises. According to Kroy, these two groups are not making any errors with respect to deducing the correct interpretation of any ethical stance because they do not hold the same ethical stance.[154]

Taxation as theft
Main article: Taxation as theft

The idea of taxation as theft is a viewpoint found in a number of political philosophies. Under this view, government transgresses property rights by enforcing compulsory tax collection.[155][156] Right-libertarians see taxation as a violation of the non-aggression principle.[157]

Schools of thought

Anarcho-capitalism
Main article: Anarcho-capitalism
Murray Rothbard

Anarcho-capitalism advocates the elimination of the state in favor of individual sovereignty in a free-market capitalism.[158][159][160] In an anarcho-capitalist society, courts, law enforcement and all other security services would be provided by privately funded competitors rather than through taxation and money would be privately and competitively provided in an open market.[161] As a result, personal and economic activities under anarcho-capitalism would be regulated by privately run law rather than through politics.[162]

The most well-known version of anarcho-capitalism was formulated in the mid-20th century by Austrian School economist and paleolibertarian Murray Rothbard. Rothbard coined the term and is widely regarded as its founder. He combined the free market approach from the Austrian School with the human rights views and a rejection of the state he learned from 19th-century American individualist anarchists such as Lysander Spooner and Benjamin Tucker, although he rejected their anti-capitalism, along with the labor theory of value and the normative implications they derived from it.[163]

In Rothbardian anarcho-capitalism, there would first be the implementation of a mutually agreed-upon libertarian "legal code which would be generally accepted and which the courts would pledge themselves to follow". This legal code would recognize sovereignty of the individual and the principle of non-aggression.[164] Many writers deny that anarcho-capitalism is a form of anarchism at all, or that capitalism itself is compatible with anarchism, regarding it instead as right-libertarian.[2][3][7]

Conservative libertarianism
See also: Fusionism
Hans-Hermann Hoppe

Conservative libertarianism combines laissez-faire economics and conservative values. It advocates the greatest possible economic liberty and the least possible government regulation of social life whilst harnessing this to traditionalist conservatism, emphasizing authority and duty.[165]

Conservative libertarianism prioritizes liberty as its main emphasis, promoting free expression, freedom of choice and laissez-faire capitalism to achieve cultural and social conservative ends whilst rejecting liberal social engineering.[166] This can also be understood as promoting civil society through conservative institutions and authority such as education, family, fatherland and religion in the quest of libertarian ends for less state power.[167]

In the United States, conservative libertarianism combines conservatism and libertarianism, representing the conservative wing of libertarianism and vice versa. Fusionism combines traditionalist and social conservatism with laissez-faire economics.[168] This is most closely associated with Frank Meyer.[169]

Minarchism
Main article: Minarchism

Within right-libertarian philosophy, minarchism[170] is supportive of a night-watchman state, a model of a state whose only functions are to provide its citizens with courts, military and police, protecting them from aggression, breach of contract, fraud and theft whilst enforcing property laws.[145][146][147] 19th-century Britain has been described by historian Charles Townshend as standard-bearer of this form of government among European countries.[171]

As a term, "night-watchman state" (German: Nachtwächterstaat) was coined by German socialist Ferdinand Lassalle, an advocate of social democratic state socialism, to criticize the bourgeois state.[172] Austrian School economist Ludwig von Mises, a classical liberal who greatly influenced right-libertarianism, later opined that Lassalle tried to make limited government look ridiculous, but that it was no more ridiculous than governments that concerned themselves with "the preparation of sauerkraut, with the manufacture of trouser buttons, or with the publication of newspapers".[173]

Robert Nozick, a right-libertarian advocate of minarchism, received a National Book Award in category Philosophy and Religion for his book Anarchy, State, and Utopia (1974),[174] where he argued that only a minimal state limited to the narrow functions of protection against "force, fraud, theft, and administering courts of law" could be justified without violating people's rights.[175][176]

Neo-classical liberalism
Not to be confused with Neoclassical liberalism
See also: Classical liberalism and Neoliberalism
Friedrich Hayek

Traditionally, liberalism's primary emphasis was placed on securing the freedom of the individual by limiting the power of the government and maximizing the power of free market forces. As a political philosophy, it advocated civil liberties under the rule of law, with an emphasis on economic freedom. Closely related to economic liberalism, it developed in the early 19th century, emerging as a response to urbanization and to the Industrial Revolution in Europe and the United States.[177][178][179][180] It advocated a limited government and held a belief in laissez-faire economic policy.[181][182][183]

Built on ideas that had already arisen by the end of the 18th century such as selected ideas of John Locke,[184] Adam Smith, Thomas Robert Malthus, Jean-Baptiste Say and David Ricardo, it drew on classical economics and economic ideas as espoused by Smith in The Wealth of Nations and stressed the belief in progress,[185] natural law[186] and utilitarianism.[187] These liberals were more suspicious than conservatives of all but the most minimal government and adopted Thomas Hobbes's theory of government, believing government had been created by individuals to protect themselves from one another.[188] The term classical liberalism was applied in retrospect to distinguish earlier 19th-century liberalism from the newer social liberalism.[189]

Neoliberalism emerged in the era following World War II during which social liberalism was the mainstream form of liberalism while Keynesianism and social democracy were the dominant ideologies in the Western world. It was led by economists such as Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman,[190] who advocated the reduction of the state and a return to classical liberalism, hence the term neo-classical liberalism. However, it did accept some aspects of social liberalism such as some degree of welfare provision by the state, but on a greatly reduced scale. Hayek and Friedman used the term classical liberalism to refer to their ideas, but others use the term to refer to all liberalism before the 20th century, not to designate any particular set of political views and therefore see all modern developments as being by definition not classical.[29]

Right-libertarianism has been influenced by these schools of liberalism. It has been commonly referred to as a continuation or radicalization of classical liberalism[29][105][106][191] and referred to as neo-classical liberalism.[192]

Neolibertarianism
Main article: Neolibertarianism

The concept of neolibertarianism gained a small following in the mid-2000s[193] among right-leaning commentators who distinguished themselves from neoconservatives by their support for individual liberties[194] and from libertarians by their support for foreign interventionism.[193]

Paleolibertarianism
Main article: Paleolibertarianism
Lew Rockwell

Paleolibertarianism was developed by American libertarian theorists Murray Rothbard and Lew Rockwell. Combining conservative cultural values and social philosophy with a libertarian opposition to government intervention,[195] it overlaps with paleoconservatism.[196][197]

In the United States, paleolibertarianism is a controversial current due its connections to the alt-right[198][199][200] and the Tea Party movement.[201][202] Besides their anti-gun control stance in regard to gun laws and politics in support of the right to keep and bear arms, these movements, especially the Old Right and paleoconservatism, are united by an anti-leftist stance.[196][203] In the essay "Right-Wing Populism: A Strategy for the Paleo Movement", Rothbard reflected on the ability of paleolibertarians to engage in an "outreach to rednecks" founded on libertarianism and social conservatism.[204] He cited former Louisiana State Representative David Duke and former United States Senator Joseph McCarthy as models for the new movement.[197]

In Europe, paleolibertarianism has some significant overlap with right-wing populism. Former European Union-parliamentarian Janusz Korwin-Mikke from KORWiN supports both laissez-faire economics and anti-immigration and anti-feminist positions.[205][206][207]

Propertarianism
Main article: Propertarianism

Propertarianism advocates the replacement of states with contractual relationships. Propertarian ideals are most commonly cited to advocate for a state or other governance body whose main or only job is to enforce contracts and private property.[208][209]

Propertarianism is generally considered right-libertarian because it "reduce[s] all human rights to rights of property, beginning with the natural right of self-ownership".[210]

As a term, propertarian appears to have been coined in 1963 by Edward Cain, who wrote:

Since their use of the word "liberty" refers almost exclusively to property, it would be helpful if we had some other word, such as "propertarian," to describe them. [...] Novelist Ayn Rand is not a conservative at all but claims to be very relevant. She is a radical capitalist, and is the closest to what I mean by a propertarian.[211]

By country

Since the 1970s, right-libertarianism has spread beyond the United States.[58][59] With the foundation of the Libertarian Party in 1971,[212][213] many countries followed the example and led to the creation of libertarian parties advocating this type of libertarianism, along with classical liberalism, economic liberalism and neoliberalism, around the world, including Britain,[214] Israel[215][216][217][218] and South Africa.[219] Internationally, the majority of those libertarian parties are grouped within the International Alliance of Libertarian Parties.[220][221][222][223] There also exists the European Party for Individual Liberty at the European level.[224]

United Kingdom

In the United Kingdom, right-libertarianism emerged and became more prominent in British politics after the 1980s neoliberalism and the economic liberalism of the premiership of Margaret Thatcher, albeit not as prominent as in the United States during the 1970s and the presidency of Republican Ronald Reagan during the 1980s.[225]

Prominent British right-libertarians include former director of the Libertarian Alliance Sean Gabb and philosopher Stephen R. L. Clark, who are seen as rightists. Gabb has called himself "a man of the right"[226] and Clark self-identifies as an "anarcho-conservative".[227][228] Gabb has also articulated a libertarian defense of the British Empire.[229] At the same time, Gabb has given a generally appreciative commentary of left-libertarian Kevin Carson's work on organization theory[230] and Clark has supported animal rights, gender inclusiveness and non-judgmental attitude toward some unconventional sexual arrangements.[231][232][233][234]

Apart from the Libertarian Party, there is also a right-libertarian faction of the mainstream Conservative Party that espouses Thatcherism.[235]

United States
Austrian School economists which greatly influenced the development of right-libertarianism in the United States

Right-libertarianism is the dominant form and better known version of libertarianism in the United States,[4][14] especially when compared with left-libertarianism.[15] Robert Nozick and Murray Rothbard have been described as the most noted advocate of this type of libertarianism.[2][3][7] Unlike Rothbard, who argued for the abolition of the state,[236] Nozick argued for a night-watchman state.[174] To this day, there remains a division between anarcho-capitalists that advocate its abolition and minarchists who support a night-watchman state.[3] According to Nozick, only such a minimal state could be justified without violating people's rights. Nozick argued that a night-watchman state provides a framework that allows for any political system that respects fundamental individual rights and therefore morally justifies the existence of a state.[175][176]

Already a radical classical liberal and anti-interventionist strongly influenced by the Old Right, especially its opposition to the managerial state whilst being more unequivocally anti-war and anti-imperialist,[237] Rothbard had become the doyen of right-libertarianism.[238][239] Before his departure from the New Left, with which he helped build for a few years a relationship with other libertarians, Rothbard considered liberalism and libertarianism to be left-wing, radical and revolutionary whereas conservatism to be right-wing, reactionary and counter-revolutionary. As for socialism, especially state socialism, Rothbard argued that it was not the opposite of libertarianism, but rather that it pursued liberal ends through conservative means, putting it in the political center.[240][241] By the time of his death in 1995,[242] Rothbard had involved the segment of the libertarian movement loyal to him in an alliance with the growing paleoconservative movement, seen by many observers, libertarian and otherwise, as flirting with racism and social reaction.[243][244] Suggesting that libertarians needed a new cultural profile that would make them more acceptable to socially and culturally conservative people, Rothbard criticized the tendency of proponents of libertarianism to appeal to "'free spirits,' to people who don't want to push other people around, and who don't want to be pushed around themselves" in contrast to "the bulk of Americans", who "might well be tight-assed conformists, who want to stamp out drugs in their vicinity, kick out people with strange dress habits, etc." while emphasizing that this was relevant as a matter of strategy. Rothbard argued that the failure to pitch the libertarian message to Middle America might result in the loss of "the tight-assed majority".[245]

Jeffrey Tucker

At least partly reflective of some of the social and cultural concerns that lay beneath Rothbard's outreach to paleoconservatives is paleolibertarianism.[246] In an early statement of this position, Lew Rockwell and Jeffrey Tucker arguing for a specifically Christian libertarianism.[97] Later, Rockwell would no longer consider himself a "paleolibertarian" and was "happy with the term libertarian".[247] While distancing himself from the paleolibertarian alliance strategy, Rockwell affirmed paleoconservatives for their "work on the immigration issue", maintaining that "porous borders in Texas and California" could be seen as "reducing liberty, not increasing it, through a form of publicly subsidized right to trespass".[248]

Hans-Hermann Hoppe argues that "libertarians must be conservatives".[249] Hoppe acknowledges what he describes as "the importance, under clearly stated circumstances, of discriminating against communists, democrats, and habitual advocates of alternative, non-family centered lifestyles, including homosexuals".[250][251] Contra Walter Block[252] and arguing that libertarianism need not be seen as requiring open borders,[253] Hoppe attributes "open border enthusiasm" to "egalitarianism".[254] While defending market anarchy in preference to both, Hoppe has argued for the superiority of monarchy to democracy, maintaining that monarchs are likely to be better stewards of the territory they claim to own than democratic politicians, whose time horizons may be shorter.[255]

Defending the fusion of traditionalist conservatism with libertarianism and rejecting the view that libertarianism means support for a liberal culture, Edward Feser implies that a central issue for those who share his viewpoint is "the preservation of traditional morality—particularly traditional sexual morality, with its idealization of marriage and its insistence that sexual activity be confined within the bounds of that institution, but also a general emphasis on dignity and temperance over self-indulgence and dissolute living".[256]

Walter Block

Walter Block identifies Feser, Hoppe and Ron Paul as "right-libertarians".[46] Rothbard's outreach to conservatives was partly triggered by his perception of negative reactions within the Libertarian Party to 1988 presidential nominee Ron Paul because of Paul's conservative appearance and his discomfort with abortion. Nonetheless, Paul himself did not make cultural issues central to his public persona during his 2008 and 2012 presidential campaigns for the Republican presidential nomination and focused on a simple message of support for personal freedom and civil liberties, commitment to fiscal discipline and opposition to war,[257] although he did continue to take what some regarded as a conservative position regarding immigration, arguing for some restrictions on cross-border freedom of movement.[258]

Paul's fellow libertarian anti-militarist Justin Raimondo, a co-founder of Antiwar.com, has described himself as a "conservative paleolibertarian". Unlike Feser and Rockwell, Raimondo's Reclaiming the American Right argues for a resurgence of Old Right political attitudes and it does not focus on the social and cultural issues that are of central importance to Foser and Rockwell.[259]

See also

References
  1. Rothbard, Murray (1 March 1971). "The Left and Right Within Libertarianism". WIN: Peace and Freedom Through Nonviolent Action. 7 (4): 6–10. Retrieved 14 January 2020.
  2. Goodway, David (2006). Anarchist Seeds Beneath the Snow: Left-Libertarian Thought and British Writers from William Morris to Colin Ward. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. p. 4. "'Libertarian' and 'libertarianism' are frequently employed by anarchists as synonyms for 'anarchist' and 'anarchism', largely as an attempt to distance themselves from the negative connotations of 'anarchy' and its derivatives. The situation has been vastly complicated in recent decades with the rise of anarcho-capitalism, 'minimal statism' and an extreme right-wing laissez-faire philosophy advocated by such theorists as Rothbard and Nozick and their adoption of the words 'libertarian' and 'libertarianism'. It has therefore now become necessary to distinguish between their right libertarianism and the left libertarianism of the anarchist tradition".
  3. Marshall, Peter (2008). Demanding the Impossible: A History of Anarchism. London: Harper Perennial. p. 565. "The problem with the term 'libertarian' is that it is now also used by the Right. [...] In its moderate form, right libertarianism embraces laissez-faire liberals like Robert Nozick who call for a minimal State, and in its extreme form, anarcho-capitalists like Murray Rothbard and David Friedman who entirely repudiate the role of the State and look to the market as a means of ensuring social order".
  4. Carlson, Jennifer D. (2012). "Libertarianism". In Miller, Wilburn R., ed. The Social History of Crime and Punishment in America. London: SAGE Publications. p. 1006. ISBN 1412988764.
  5. Wündisch 2014.
  6. Reiman, Jeffrey H. (2005). "The Fallacy of Libertarian Capitalism". Ethics. 10 (1): 85–95. doi:10.1086/292300. JSTOR 2380706.
  7. Newman, Saul (2010). The Politics of Postanarchism. Edinburgh University Press. p. 53. ISBN 978-0-7486-3495-8. It is important to distinguish between anarchism and certain strands of right-wing libertarianism which at times go by the same name (for example, Murray Rothbard's anarcho-capitalism). There is a complex debate within this tradition between those like Robert Nozick, who advocate a 'minimal state', and those like Rothbard who want to do away with the state altogether and allow all transactions to be governed by the market alone. From an anarchist perspective, however, both positions—the minimal state (minarchist) and the no-state ('anarchist') positions—neglect the problem of economic domination; in other words, they neglect the hierarchies, oppressions, and forms of exploitation that would inevitably arise in a laissez-faire 'free' market. [...] Anarchism, therefore, has no truck with this right-wing libertarianism, not only because it neglects economic inequality and domination, but also because in practice (and theory) it is highly inconsistent and contradictory. The individual freedom invoked by right-wing libertarians is only a narrow economic freedom within the constraints of a capitalist market, which, as anarchists show, is no freedom at all.
  8. Kymlicka 2005, p. 516: "Right-wing libertarians argue that the right of self-ownership entails the right to appropriate unequal parts of the external world, such as unequal amounts of land."
  9. Francis, Mark (December 1983). "Human Rights and Libertarians". Australian Journal of Politics & History. 29 (3): 462–472. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8497.1983.tb00212.x. ISSN 0004-9522.
  10. Vallentyne 2007, p. 6. "The best-known versions of libertarianism are right-libertarian theories, which hold that agents have a very strong moral power to acquire full private property rights in external things. Left-libertarians, by contrast, hold that natural resources (e.g., space, land, minerals, air, and water) belong to everyone in some egalitarian manner and thus cannot be appropriated without the consent of, or significant payment to, the members of society."
  11. Miller, Fred (15 August 2008). "Natural Law". The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism. Retrieved 31 July 2019.
  12. Sterba, James P. (October 1994). "From Liberty to Welfare". Ethics. Cambridge: Blackwell. 105 (1): 237–241.
  13. Baradat 2015, p. 31.
  14. Beltrán, Miquel (1989). "Libertarismo y deber. Una reflexión sobre la ética de Nozick" [Libertarianism and duty. A reflection on Nozick's ethics]. Revista de ciencias sociales (in Spanish). 91: 123–128. ISSN 0210-0223.
  15. Vallentyne, Peter (20 July 2010). "Libertarianism". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford University. Retrieved 26 December 2012.
  16. Rothbard, Murray (2009) [2007]. The Betrayal of the American Right (PDF). Mises Institute. p. 83. ISBN 978-1610165013. One gratifying aspect of our rise to some prominence is that, for the first time in my memory, we, 'our side,' had captured a crucial word from the enemy. 'Libertarians' had long been simply a polite word for left-wing anarchists, that is for anti-private property anarchists, either of the communist or syndicalist variety. But now we had taken it over.
  17. Bookchin, Murray (January 1986). "The Greening of Politics: Toward a New Kind of Political Practice". Green Perspectives: Newsletter of the Green Program Project (1). "We have permitted cynical political reactionaries and the spokesmen of large corporations to pre-empt these basic libertarian American ideals. We have permitted them not only to become the specious voice of these ideals such that individualism has been used to justify egotism; the pursuit of happiness to justify greed, and even our emphasis on local and regional autonomy has been used to justify parochialism, insularism, and exclusivity – often against ethnic minorities and so-called deviant individuals. We have even permitted these reactionaries to stake out a claim to the word libertarian, a word, in fact, that was literally devised in the 1890s in France by Elisée Reclus as a substitute for the word anarchist, which the government had rendered an illegal expression for identifying one's views. The propertarians, in effect – acolytes of Ayn Rand, the earth mother of greed, egotism, and the virtues of property – have appropriated expressions and traditions that should have been expressed by radicals but were willfully neglected because of the lure of European and Asian traditions of socialism, socialisms that are now entering into decline in the very countries in which they originated".
  18. Nettlau, Max (1996). A Short History of Anarchism. London: Freedom Press. p. 162. ISBN 978-0-900384-89-9. OCLC 37529250.
  19. Fernandez, Frank (2001). Cuban Anarchism. The History of a Movement. Sharp Press. p. 9. "Thus, in the United States, the once exceedingly useful term "libertarian" has been hijacked by egotists who are in fact enemies of liberty in the full sense of the word."
  20. "The Week Online Interviews Chomsky". Z Magazine. 23 February 2002. "The term libertarian as used in the US means something quite different from what it meant historically and still means in the rest of the world. Historically, the libertarian movement has been the anti-statist wing of the socialist movement. In the US, which is a society much more dominated by business, the term has a different meaning. It means eliminating or reducing state controls, mainly controls over private tyrannies. Libertarians in the US don't say let's get rid of corporations. It is a sort of ultra-rightism."
  21. Ward, Colin (2004). Anarchism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press. p. 62. "For a century, anarchists have used the word 'libertarian' as a synonym for 'anarchist', both as a noun and an adjective. The celebrated anarchist journal Le Libertaire was founded in 1896. However, much more recently the word has been appropriated by various American free-market philosophers."
  22. Robert Graham, ed. (2005). Anarchism: A Documentary History of Libertarian Ideas. Volume One: From Anarchy to Anarchism (300 CE–1939). Montreal: Black Rose Books. §17.
  23. Marshall, Peter (2009). Demanding the Impossible: A History of Anarchism. p. 641. "The word 'libertarian' has long been associated with anarchism, and has been used repeatedly throughout this work. The term originally denoted a person who upheld the doctrine of the freedom of the will; in this sense, Godwin was not a 'libertarian', but a 'necessitarian'. It came however to be applied to anyone who approved of liberty in general. In anarchist circles, it was first used by Joseph Déjacque as the title of his anarchist journal Le Libertaire, Journal du Mouvement Social published in New York in 1858. At the end of the last century, the anarchist Sebastien Faure took up the word, to stress the difference between anarchists and authoritarian socialists".
  24. The Anarchist FAQ Editorial Collective (11 December 2008). "150 years of Libertarian". Anarchist Writers. The Anarchist Library. Retrieved 31 January 2020.
  25. The Anarchist FAQ Editorial Collective (17 May 2017). "160 years of Libertarian". Anarchist Writers. Anarchist FAQ. Retrieved 31 January 2020.
  26. Marshall, Peter (2009). Demanding the Impossible: A History of Anarchism. p. 641. "For a long time, libertarian was interchangable in France with anarchism but in recent years, its meaning has become more ambivalente. Some anarchists like Daniel Guérin will call themselves 'libertarian socialists', partly to avoid the negative overtones still associated with anarchism, and partly to stress the place of anarchism within the socialist tradition. Even Marxists of the New Left like E. P. Thompson call themselves 'libertarian' to distinguish themselves from those authoritarian socialists and communists who believe in revolutionary dictatorship and vanguard parties."
  27. Heywood 2004, p. 337.
  28. Newman 2010, p. 43: "It is important to distinguish between anarchism and certain strands of right-wing libertarianism which at times go by the same name (for example, Murray Rothbard's anarcho-capitalism). There is a complex debate within this tradition between those like Robert Nozick, who advocate a 'minimal state', and those like Rothbard who want to do away with the state altogether and allow all transactions to be governed by the market alone. From an anarchist perspective, however, both positions—the minimal state (minarchist) and the no-state ('anarchist') positions—neglect the problem of economic domination; in other words, they neglect the hierarchies, oppressions, and forms of exploitation that would inevitably arise in a laissez-faire 'free' market. [...] Anarchism, therefore, has no truck with this right-wing libertarianism, not only because it neglects economic inequality and domination, but also because in practice (and theory) it is highly inconsistent and contradictory. The individual freedom invoked by right-wing libertarians is only a narrow economic freedom within the constraints of a capitalist market, which, as anarchists show, is no freedom at all."
  29. Goodman, John C. (20 December 2005). "What Is Classical Liberalism?". National Center for Policy Analysis. Retrieved 26 June 2019. Archived 9 March 2009 at the Wayback Machine.
  30. van de Haar 2015, p. 71.
  31. van de Haar 2015, p. 42.
  32. van de Haar 2015, p. 43.
  33. Long, Joseph. W (1996). "Toward a Libertarian Theory of Class". Social Philosophy and Policy. 15 (2): 310. "When I speak of 'libertarianism' [...] I mean all three of these very different movements. It might be protested that LibCap [libertarian capitalism], LibSoc [libertarian socialism] and LibPop [libertarian populism] are too different from one another to be treated as aspects of a single point of view. But they do share a common—or at least an overlapping—intellectual ancestry."
  34. Carlson, Jennifer D. (2012). "Libertarianism". In Miller, Wilburn R., ed. The Social History of Crime and Punishment in America. London: SAGE Publications. p. 1006. ISBN 1412988764. "There exist three major camps in libertarian thought: right-libertarianism, socialist libertarianism, and left-libertarianism; the extent to which these represent distinct ideologies as opposed to variations on a theme is contested by scholars."
  35. Déjacque, Joseph (1857). "De l'être-humain mâle et femelle–Lettre à P.J. Proudhon" (in French).
  36. Mouton, Jean Claude. "Le Libertaire, Journal du mouvement social" (in French). Retrieved 16 July 2019.
  37. Woodcock, George (1962). Anarchism: A History of Libertarian Ideas and Movements. Meridian Books. p. 280. "He called himself a "social poet," and published two volumes of heavily didactic verse—Lazaréennes and Les Pyrénées Nivelées. In New York, from 1858 to 1861, he edited an anarchist paper entitled Le Libertaire, Journal du Mouvement Social, in whose pages he printed as a serial his vision of the anarchist Utopia, entitled L'Humanisphére."
  38. Hussain, Syed B. (2004). Encyclopedia of Capitalism. Vol. II : H-R. New York: Facts on File Inc. p. 492. ISBN 0816052247. In the modern world, political ideologies are largely defined by their attitude towards capitalism. Marxists want to overthrow it, liberals to curtail it extensively, conservatives to curtail it moderately. Those who maintain that capitalism is a excellent economic system, unfairly maligned, with little or no need for corrective government policy, are generally known as libertarians.
  39. Carlson, Jennifer D. (2012). "Libertarianism". In Miller, Wilburn R., ed. The Social History of Crime and Punishment in America. London: Sage Publications. p. 1006. ISBN 1412988764. "There exist three major camps in libertarian thought: right-libertarianism, socialist libertarianism, and left-libertarianism. [...] [S]ocialist libertarians [...] advocate for the simultaneous abolition of both government and capitalism."
  40. Bookchin, Murray; Biehl, Janet (1997). The Murray Bookchin Reader. Cassell. p. 170 ISBN 0-304-33873-7.
  41. Hicks, Steven V.; Shannon, Daniel E. (2003). The American Journal of Economics and Sociolology. Blackwell Pub. p. 612.
  42. "Anarchism". In Gaus, Gerald F.; D'Agostino, Fred, eds. (2012). The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy. p. 227.
  43. Kitschelt, Herbert; McGann, Anthony J. (1997) [1995]. The Radical Right in Western Europe: A Comparative Analysis. University of Michigan Press. p. 27. ISBN 9780472084418.
  44. Mudde, Cas (11 October 2016). The Populist Radical Right: A Reader (1st ed.). Routledge. ISBN 978-1138673861.
  45. Bevir, Mark, ed. (2010). Encyclopedia of Political Theory. SAGE Publications. p. 811. ISBN 978-1-4129-5865-3.
  46. Block, Walter (2010). "Libertarianism Is Unique and Belongs Neither to the Right Nor the Left: A Critique of the Views of Long, Holcombe, and Baden on the Left, Hoppe, Feser, and Paul on the Right". Journal of Libertarian Studies. 22. pp. 127–170.
  47. Read, Leonard E. (January 1956). "Neither Left Nor Right". The Freeman. 48 (2): 71–73.
  48. Browne, Harry (21 December 1998). "The Libertarian Stand on Abortion". HarryBrowne.Org. Retrieved 14 January 2020.
  49. Raimondo, Justin (2000). An Enemy of the State. Chapter 4: "Beyond left and right". Prometheus Books. p. 159.
  50. Machan, Tibor R. (2004). "Neither Left Nor Right: Selected Columns". 522. Hoover Institution Press. ISBN 0817939822. ISBN 9780817939823.
  51. Robin, Corey (2011). The Reactionary Mind: Conservatism from Edmund Burke to Sarah Palin. Oxford University Press. pp. 15–16. ISBN 978-0199793747.
  52. Harmel, Robert; Gibson, Rachel K. (June 1995). "Right‐Libertarian Parties and the "New Values": A Re‐examination". Scandinavian Political Studies. 18 (July 1993): 97–118. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9477.1995.tb00157.x.
  53. Robinson, Emily; et al. (2017). "Telling stories about post-war Britain: popular individualism and the 'crisis' of the 1970s". Twentieth Century British History. 28 (2): 268–304.
  54. McManus, Matt (26 May 2019). "Classical Liberals" and the Alt-Right". Merion West. Retrieved 17 June 2020. "Nevertheless, it is worth examining why many who do adopt this labels do paradoxically seem to gravitate towards post-modern conservative reactionary positions. [...] The second way individuals tend to interpret classical liberalism and libertarianism is as an ideology which is strictly inegalitarian. They tend to support it because they see society as a competitive association, where superior individuals will rise to the top due to their merits and efforts. While they identify as classical liberals and libertarians, these individuals tend to limit themselves to desiring a capitalist marketplace to discriminate between the superior and inferior by allocating rewards and honors according to economic contributions. But if these individuals come to believe the system increasingly rewards the unworthy, they can be inspired to radicalize and move further to the extremes offered by alt-right doctrines."
  55. "About the Quiz". Advocates for Self-Government. Retrieved 18 January 2020.
  56. Micthell, Brian Patrick (2007). Eight Ways to Run the Country: A New and Revealing Look at Left and Right. Greenwood Publishing Group. pp. 7–8. ISBN 978-0-275-99358-0.
  57. Huebert, Jacob H. (2010). Libertarianism Today. Santa Barbara, California: Praeger. pp. 22–24. ISBN 9780313377556. OCLC 655885097.
  58. Teles, Steven; Kenney, Daniel A. (2008). "Spreading the Word: The Diffusion of American Conservatism in Europe and Beyond". In Steinmo, Sven (2007). Growing Apart?: America and Europe in the Twenty-First Century. Cambridge University Press. pp. 136–169.
  59. Gregory, Anthony (24 April 2007). "Real World Politics and Radical Libertarianism". LewRockwell.com. Archived 18 June 2015 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved 25 January 2020.
  60. Boaz, David (21 November 1998). "Preface for the Japanese Edition of Libertarianism: A Primer". Cato Institute. Retrieved 25 January 2020.
  61. Silber, Kenneth (4 February 2007). "Radicals for Capitalism (Book Review)". The New York Post. Archived 8 December 2008 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved 25 January 2020.
  62. Vallentyne, Peter (12 February 2007). "Libertarianism and the State". In Frankel Paul, Ellen; Miller Jr., Fred; Paul, Jeffrey (eds.). Liberalism: Old and New. 24. Cambridge University Press. pp. 187–205. ISBN 978-0-521-70305-5.
  63. Boas, Taylor C.; Gans-Morse, Jordan (2009). "Neoliberalism: From New Liberal Philosophy to Anti-Liberal Slogan". Studies in Comparative International Development. 44 (2): 151–152. doi:10.1007/s12116-009-9040-5.
  64. Knapp, Andrew; Wright, Vincent (2006). The Government and Politics of France. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-35732-6.
  65. John, David C. (21 November 2003). "The Origins of the Modern American Conservative Movement". The Heritage Foundation. Retrieved 13 May 2010.
  66. Becker, Charlotte B.; Becker, Lawrence C. (2001). Encyclopedia of Ethics. 3. Taylor & Francis US. p. 1562. ISBN 978-0-4159-3675-0.
  67. "Smashing the State for Fun and Profit Since 1969: An Interview With the Libertarian Icon Samuel Edward Konkin III (a.k.a. SEK3)". Spaz.org. Retrieved 15 March 2020.
  68. D'Amato, David S. (27 November 2018). "Black-Market Activism: Samuel Edward Konkin III and Agorism". Libertarianism.org. Retrieved 21 November 2019.
  69. Konkin III, Samuel Edward. "An Agorist Primer" (PDF). Kopubco.com. Retrieved 15 March 2020.
  70. Konkin III, Samuel Edward (1983). "New Libertarian Manifesto". Agorism.info. Archived 18 March 2009 at the Wayback Machine  Retrieved 18 March 2009.
  71. Gregory, Anthony (21 December 2006). "Left, Right, Moderate and Radical". LewRockwell.com. Archived 25 December 2014 at the Wayback Machine. 25 January 2020.
  72. Marx, Karl (1971). Theories of Surplus Value. 3. Moscow: Progress. p. 501.
  73. Carson, Kevin. Studies in Mutualist Political Economy]. Charleston, South Carolina: BookSurge. p. 142. "Vulgar libertarian apologists for capitalism use the term "free market" in an equivocal sense: they seem to have trouble remembering, from one moment to the next, whether they're defending actually existing capitalism or free market principles. So we get the standard boilerplate article in The Freeman arguing that the rich can't get rich at the expense of the poor, because "that's not how the free market works"—implicitly assuming that this is a free market. When prodded, they'll grudgingly admit that the present system is not a free market, and that it includes a lot of state intervention on behalf of the rich. But as soon as they think they can get away with it, they go right back to defending the wealth of existing corporations on the basis of "free market principles."
  74. Miller, David, ed. (1991). Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Political Thought. Blackwell Publishing. p. 290. ISBN 0-631-17944-5.
  75. Rothbard, Murray (2007). Betrayal of the American Right. Auburn, Alabama: Mises Institute. p. xi. ISBN 978-1-4792-2951-2.
  76. Kauffman, Bill (18 May 2009). "Found Cause". The American Conservative. Retrieved 15 March 2020.
  77. Radosh, Ronald (1975). Prophets on the Right: Profiles of Conservative Critics of American Globalism. New York City, New York: Simon.
  78. Raimondo, Justin (2008). Reclaiming the American Right: The Lost Legacy of the Conservative Movement (2d ed.). Wilmington, Delawere: ISI.
  79. Chodorov, Frank (1962). Out of Step: The Autobiography of an Individualist. New York City, New York: Devin-Adair.
  80. Hamilton, Charles H. (1980). Fugitive Essays: Selected Writings of Frank Chodorov. Indianapolis, Indiana: Liberty.
  81. Flynn, John T. (1973) [1944]. As We Go Marching: A Biting Indictment of the Coming of Domestic Fascism in America. New York City, New York: Free Life.
  82. Moser, John (2005). Right Turn: John T. Flynn and the Transformation of American Liberalism. New York City, New York: New York University Press.
  83. Ryant, Carl (1989). Profit's Prophet: Garet Garrett (1878-1954). Selinsgrove, Pennsylvania: Susquehanna University Press.
  84. Ramsey, Bruce (2008). Unsanctioned Voice: Garet Garrett, Journalist of the Old Right. Caldwell, Indiana: Caxton.
  85. Wilder Lane, Rose (2006) [1936]. Give Me Liberty. Whitefish, Montana: Kessinger.
  86. Wilder Lane, Rose (2007) [1943]. The Discovery of Freedom: Man's Struggle against Authority. Auburn, Alabama: Mises Institute.
  87. Mencken, H. L. (1961). Letters of H. L. Mencken. Knofp. p. xiii; p. 189.
  88. Nock, Albert Jay (1935). Our Enemy, the State. New York City, New York: Morrow.
  89. Nock, Albert Jay (June 1936). "Isaiah’s Job". Atlantic Monthly (157): 641–649.
  90. Nock, Albert Jay (1943). Memoirs of a Superfluous Man. New York City, New York: Harper.
  91. Paterson, Isabel (1993). The God of the Machine. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Transaction.
  92. Cox, Stephen D. (2004). The Woman and the Dynamo: Isabel Paterson and the Idea of America. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Transaction.
  93. Kauffman, Bill (2008). Ain't My America: The Long, Noble History of Antiwar Conservatism and Middle-American Anti-Imperialism. New York City, New York: Metropolitan.
  94. Chodorov, Frank (6 October 1956). "Letter to the editor". National Review. 2 (20): 23.
  95. Hamilton, Charles H. (1981). "Introduction". Fugitive Essays: Selected Writings of Frank Chodorov Compiled. p. 29.
  96. Rothbard, Murray (2007). Betrayal of the American Right. Auburn, Alabama: Mises Institute. p. 165. ISBN 978-1-4792-2951-2.
  97. Rockwell, Lew; Tucker, Jeffrey (28 May 1990). "Ayn Rand Is Dead". National Review. pp. 35–36. Retrieved 16 March 2020.
  98. Raimondo, Justin (2000). An Enemy of the State: The Life of Murray N. Rothbard. "Beyond left and right". Prometheus Books. p. 159. ISBN 978-1-5739-2809-0.
  99. Rothbard, Murray (17 August 2007). "Floyd Arthur 'Baldy' Harper, RIP". Mises Daily. Mises Institute. Retrieved 15 March 2020.
  100. D'Agostino, Fred; Gaus, Gerald (2012). The Routledge Companion To Social And Political Philosophy. Routledge. p. 225. ISBN 978-0-415-87456-4.
  101. Casey, Gerard (2010). Murray Rothbard. A&C Black. p. ix. ISBN 978-1-4411-4209-2.
  102. Block, Walter; Rothbard, Murray; Rockwell, Lew, ed. (November 1994). "Big Government Libertarianism". The Irrepressible Rothbard. Lew Rockwell.com. Retrieved 15 March 2020.
  103. Sanchez, Julian; Weigel, David (16 January 2008). "Who Wrote Ron Paul's Newsletters?". Reason. Reason Foundation. Retrieved 15 March 2020.
  104. Lester, J. C. (22 October 2017). "New-Paradigm Libertarianism: a Very Brief Explanation". PhilPapers. Retrieved 26 June 2019.
  105. Boaz, David (1998). Libertarianism: A Primer. Free Press. pp. 22–26.
  106. Conway, David (2008). "Freedom of Speech". In Hamowy, Ronald (ed.). Liberalism, Classical. The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications; Cato Institute. pp. 295–98 at p. 296. doi:10.4135/9781412965811.n112. ISBN 978-1-4129-6580-4. LCCN 2008009151. OCLC 750831024. Depending on the context, libertarianism can be seen as either the contemporary name for classical liberalism, adopted to avoid confusion in those countries where liberalism is widely understood to denote advocacy of expansive government powers, or as a more radical version of classical liberalism.
  107. "About the Libertarian Party". Libertarian Party. Retrieved 27 June 2019. "Libertarians strongly oppose any government interference into their personal, family, and business decisions. Essentially, we believe all Americans should be free to live their lives and pursue their interests as they see fit as long as they do no harm to another".
  108. Newman, Saul (2010). The Politics of Postanarchism. Edinburgh University Press. p. 43. ISBN 0748634959. "It is important to distinguish between anarchism and certain strands of right-wing libertarianism which at times go by the same name (for example, Rothbard's anarcho-capitalism)".
  109. Marshall, Peter (2008). Demanding the Impossible: A History of Anarchism. London: Harper Perennial. p. 565. "In fact, few anarchists would accept the 'anarcho-capitalists' into the anarchist camp since they do not share a concern for economic equality and social justice, Their self-interested, calculating market men would be incapable of practicing voluntary co-operation and mutual aid. Anarcho-capitalists, even if they do reject the State, might therefore best be called right-wing libertarians rather than anarchists".
  110. Nozick, Robert (1974). Anarchy, State, and Utopia. Basic Books.
  111. Raico, Ralph (2012). Classical Liberalism and the Austrian School. Auburn, Alabama: Mises Institute. ISBN 9781610160032.
  112. "National Questions" (30 June 1997). National Review. 49 (12): 16–17.
  113. Carson, Kevin (8 November 2015). "Are We All Mutualists?" Center for a Stateless Society. Retrieved 23 March 2020. "This willingness to recognize the joint homesteading of land and natural resources (in such historical forms as village open-field systems, common pasture and waste, public rights of way and town commons, common fisheries, etc.) is a refreshing contrast to the all too many right-libertarians who insist that property can only be owned by individuals (most notably Ayn Rand’s claim that the theft of Native American tribal land by European settlers was justified because they didn’t believe in any “legitimate” form of property rights)."
  114. Long, Roderick T. (16 May 2006). "Francis Tandy Rides Again". History News Network. Archived 5 September 2010 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved 8 July 2009.
  115. McManus, Matt (26 May 2019). "Classical Liberals" and the Alt-Right". Merion West. Retrieved 17 June 2020. "In his great work Anarchy, State, and Utopia, Nozick hypothesizes about a future where a "minimal state" exists and individuals are free to experiment with as many different forms of life as they choose. This may even include communist or socialist communities, where individuals would willingly choose to share property in common and live according to more egalitarian principles of distributive justice. But no one form of life would be enforced by political authorities, which had no business telling free and equal individuals what the best way to live was."
  116. Mises, Ludwig; Kahane, J., trans. (1947) [1922]. Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press. p. 76. ISBN 0226181502. "The only certain fact about Russian affairs under the Soviet regime with regard to which all people agree is: that the standard of living of the Russian masses is much lower than that of the masses in the country which is universally considered as the paragon of capitalism, the United States of America. If we were to regard the Soviet regime as an experiment, we would have to say that the experiment has clearly demonstrated the superiority of capitalism and the inferiority of socialism".
  117. Hoppe, Hans-Hermann (2013) [1988]. A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism (2nd ed.). Auburn, Alabama: Mises Institute. ISBN 978-1933550732.
  118. Nozick, Robert (1974). Anarchy, State, and Utopia. Basic Books. ISBN 978-0-465-09720-3.
  119. Kropotkin, Peter (1927). Anarchism: A Collection of Revolutionary Writings. Courier Dover Publications. p. 150. ISBN 9780486119861. It attacks not only capital, but also the main sources of the power of capitalism: law, authority, and the State.
  120. Otero, Carlos Peregrin (2003). "Introduction to Chomsky's Social Theory". In Otero, Carlos Peregrin (ed.). Radical Priorities. Chomsky, Noam Chomsky (3rd ed.). Oakland, California: AK Press. p. 26. ISBN 1-902593-69-3.
  121. Chomsky, Noam (2003). Carlos Peregrin Otero (ed.). Radical Priorities (3rd ed.). Oakland, California: AK Press. pp. 227–228. ISBN 1-902593-69-3.
  122. Carlson, Jennifer D. (2012). "Libertarianism". In Miller, Wilbur R. The Social History of Crime and Punishment in America: An Encyclopedia. SAGE Publications. p. 1006. "[S]ocialist libertarians view any concentration of power into the hands of a few (whether politically or economically) as antithetical to freedom and thus advocate for the simultaneous abolition of both government and capitalism".
  123. Metcalf, Stephen (24 June 2011). "The Liberty Scam: Why even Robert Nozick, the philosophical father of libertarianism, gave up on the movement he inspired". Slate. Retrieved 19 March 2020.
  124. Nozick, Robert (1989). "The Zigzag of Politics". The Examined Life: Philosophical Meditations. Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-0-671-72501-3.
  125. Riggenbach, Jeff (26 November 2010). "Anarchy, State, and Robert Nozick". Mises Daily. Mises Institute. Retrieved 19 March 2020. [Nozick] identified voluntary cooperation as the 'core principle' of ethics, maintaining that the duty not to interfere with another person's 'domain of choice' is '[a]ll that any society should (coercively) demand'; higher levels of ethics, involving positive benevolence, represent instead a 'personal ideal' that should be left to 'a person's own individual choice and development.' And that certainly sounds like an attempt to embrace libertarianism all over again. My own view is that Nozick's thinking about these matters evolved over time and that what he wrote at any given time was an accurate reflection of what he was thinking at that time.
  126. Sanchez, Julian (21 June 2011). "Nozick, Libertarianism, and Thought Experiments". Julian Shanchez.com. Retrieved 19 March 2020. "Nozick always thought of himself as a libertarian in a broad sense, right up to his final days, even as his views became somewhat less 'hardcore.'"
  127. "Join the Libertarian Party". Libertarian Party. 1971. Retrieved 18 January 2020. I certify that I oppose the initiation of force to achieve political or social goals.
  128. Block, Walter (17 February 2003). "The Non-Aggression Axiom of Libertarianism". Lew Rockwell.com. Retrieved 18 January 2020.
  129. Barnet, Phred (14 April 2011). "The Non-Aggression Principle". Americanly Yours. Retrieved 18 January 2020.
  130. Kinsella, Stephan (4 October 2011). "The relation between the non-aggression principle and property rights: a response to Division by Zer0". Mises Wire. Mises Institute. Retrieved 26 June 2019.
  131. Vance, Laurence M. Vance (1 October 2015). "The Morality of Libertarianism". The Future of Freedom Foundation. Retrieved 18 January 2020.
  132. Kinsella, Stephan (21 August 2009). "What Libertarianism Is". Mises Daily. Mises Institute. Retrieved 20 January 2020.
  133. Friedman, Jeffrey (1993). "What's Wrong with Libertarianism". Critical Review. 11 (3). p. 427.
  134. Sterba, James P. (October 1994). "From Liberty to Welfare". Ethics. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Blackwell. 105 (1): 237–241.
  135. Partridge, Ernest (2004). "With Liberty and Justice for Some". In Zimmerman, Michael; Callicott, Baird; Warren, Karen; Klaver, Irene; Clark, John. Environmental Philosophy: From Animal Rights to Radical Ecology (4th ed.). Pearson. ISBN 978-0-1311-2695-4.
  136. Wolff, Jonathan (22 October 2006). "Libertarianism, Utility, and Economic Competition" (PDF). Virginia Law Review. Archived from the original (PDF) on 12 January 2013. Retrieved 10 February 2020. Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  137. Fried, Barbara (2009). The Progressive Assault on Laissez Faire: Robert Hale and the First Law and Economics Movement. Harvard University Press. p. 50. ISBN 9780674037304.
  138. Bruenig, Matt (28 October 2013). "Libertarians Are Huge Fans of Economic Coercion". Demos. Archived from the original on 18 February 2019. Retrieved 19 August 2016.
  139. Bruenig, Matt (17 November 2013). "Libertarians are Huge Fans of Initiating Force". Demos. Archived from the original on 15 December 2018. Retrieved 19 August 2016.
  140. Carlson 2012, p. 1007.
  141. Vallentyne, Peter (20 July 2010). "Libertarianism". In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford University. Retrieved 26 December 2012.
  142. Becker, Lawrence C.; Becker, Charlotte B. (2001). Encyclopedia of Ethics. 3. New York: Routledge. p. 1562.
  143. Rothbard, Murray (1998). The Ethics of Liberty. New York: NYU Press. ISBN 978-0814775066.
  144. Mises, Ludwig (2007). Human Action: A Treatise on Economics. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund. ISBN 978-0865976313.
  145. Gregory, Anthony (10 May 2004). "The Minarchist's Dilemma". Strike The Root. Retrieved 26 June 2019.
  146. "What role should certain specific governments play in Objectivist government?". Peikoff.com. 7 March 2011. Retrieved 26 June 2019.
  147. "Interview with Yaron Brook on economic issues in today's world (Part 1)". Peikoff.com. 10 March 2011. Retrieved 26 June 2019.
  148. Emmett, Ross B. (12 August 2011). Frank H. Knight in Iowa City, 1919–1928. Emerald Group Publishing. ISBN 978-1-78052-008-7.
  149. Long, Roderick T.; Machan, Tibor R., eds. (2008). Anarchism/Minarchism: Is a Government Part of a Free Country?. Ashgate Publishing. ISBN 978-0-7546-6066-8.
  150. Holcombe, Randall G. (2004). "Government: Unnecessary but Inevitable" (PDF). The Independent Review. Retrieved 17 March 2020.
  151. Long, Roderick T. (16 February 2009). "Market Anarchism as Constitutionalism". Molinari Institute. Retrieved 26 June 2019.
  152. Plauché, Geoffrey Allan (27 August 2006). "On the Social Contract and the Persistence of Anarchy" (PDF). American Political Science Association. Baton Rouge, Louisiana: Louisiana State University. Archived from the original (PDF) on 10 September 2008.
  153. Tannehill, Linda; Tannehill, Morris (1970). The Market for Liberty. p. 81. Retrieved 26 June 2019.
  154. Kroy, Moshe (21 September 2010). "Political Freedom and Its Roots in Metaphysics". Mises Institute. Retrieved 26 June 2019.
  155. Feserm, Edward (Fall 2000). "Taxation, Forced Labor, and Theft" (PDF). The Independent Review: 219–235). Retrieved 10 July 2012.
  156. Tame, Chris R. (1989). "Taxation Is Theft" (PDF). Libertarian Alliance Political Note (44). Retrieved 2 September 2012.
  157. Chodorov, Frank. "Taxation Is Robbery". Mises Institute. Retrieved 10 July 2012. Reprint from Chodorov, Frank (1962). Out of Step: The Autobiography of an Individualist. New York: The Devin-Adair Company. pp. 216–239.
  158. Stringham 2007, p. 51.
  159. Morris 2008, pp. 13–14.
  160. Caplan 2008, pp. 194–195.
  161. Tannehill, Linda; Tannehill, Morris (1993). The Market for Liberty (PDF). San Francisco: Fox & Wilkes. pp. 105–106. ISBN 978-0-930073-08-4. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
  162. "Review of Kosanke's Instead of Politics – Don Stacy" (2011). Libertarian Papers. 3 (3).
  163. Miller 1987, p. 290. "A student and disciple of the Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises, Rothbard combined the laissez-faire economics of his teacher with the absolutist views of human rights and rejection of the state he had absorbed from studying the individualist American anarchists of the nineteenth century such as Lysander Spooner and Benjamin Tucker".
  164. Rothbard, Murray (1973). For A New Liberty. "The Public Sector, III: Police, Law, and the Courts". Mises Institute. Retrieved 26 June 2019.
  165. Heywood 2015, p. 37.
  166. Piper, J. Richard (1997). Ideologies and Institutions: American Conservative and Liberal Governance Prescriptions Since 1933. Rowman & Littlefield. pp. 110–111. ISBN 0847684598. ISBN 978-0847684595.
  167. Hoppe, Hans-Hermann (28 September 2018). "Getting Libertarianism Right". Mises Institute. ISBN 978-1-61016-690-4.
  168. Dionne Jr., E. J. (1991). Why Americans Hate Politics. New York: Simon & Schuster. p. 161.
  169. Meyer, Frank S. (1996). In Defense of Freedom and Other Essays. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.
  170. Konkin III, Samuel Edward (1980). New Libertarian Manifesto. p. 9.
  171. Townshend, Charles (2000). The Oxford History of Modern War. Oxford University Press. p. 15. ISBN 0-19-285373-2.
  172. Sawer, Marian (2003). The Ethical State?: Social Liberalism in Australia. Melbourne University Publishing. p. 87. ISBN 0-522-85082-0. ISBN 978-0-522-85082-6.
  173. Mises, Ludwig (1927) [1922]. Liberalism. p. 37.
  174. "National Book Awards – 1975" (1975). National Book Foundation. Retrieved 8 March 2012. Archived 9 September 2011 at the Wayback Machine.
  175. Feser, Edward. "Robert Nozick (1938—2002)". Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 13 March 2017.
  176. Gordon, David (2008). "Minimal State". In Hamowy, Ronald (ed.). The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications; Cato Institute. pp. 332–334. doi:10.4135/9781412965811.n204. ISBN 978-1412965804. LCCN 2008009151. OCLC 750831024.
  177. Conway, p. 296.
  178. Hudelson, Richard (1999). Modern Political Philosophy. M. E. Sharpe. pp. 37–38. ISBN 9780765600219.
  179. Dickerson, Flanagan & O'Neill, p. 129.
  180. Hamowy, ed. (2008). p. xxix.
  181. Hudelson, Richard (1999). Modern Political Philosophy. M. E. Sharpe. pp. 37–38. ISBN 9780765600219.
  182. Dickerson, M. O. et al. (2009). An Introduction to Government and Politics: A Conceptual Approach. p. 129.
  183. Bronfenbrenner, Martin (1955). "Two Concepts of Economic Freedom". Ethics. 65 (3): 157–217. doi:10.1086/290998. JSTOR 2378928.
  184. Steven M. Dworetz (1994). The Unvarnished Doctrine: Locke, Liberalism, and the American Revolution.
  185. Hunt, p. 54.
  186. Appleby, Joyce (1992). Liberalism and Republicanism in the Historical Imagination. p. 58.
  187. Gaus, Gerald F.; Kukathas, Chandran (2004). Handbook of Political Theory. p. 422.
  188. Quinton, A. (1995). "Conservativism". In Goodin, R. E.; Pettit, P. eds. A Companion to Contemporary Political Philosophy. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. p. 246.
  189. Richardson, p. 52.
  190. Richardson, James L. (2001). Contending Liberalisms in World Politics: Ideology and Power. Lynne Rienner Publishers. p. 43. ISBN 9781555879396.
  191. Vallentyne 2007, p. 1. "The best known form of libertarianism—right-libertarianism—is a version of classical liberalism [...]."
  192. Mayne, Alan James (1999). From Politics Past to Politics Future: An Integrated Analysis of Current and Emergent Paradigmss. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 124. ISBN 0-275-96151-6.
  193. Freund, Charles Paul (1 April 2005). "You Know You're Neolibertarian If..." Reason. Retrieved 12 October 2018.
  194. Franks, Dale (10 November 2012). "Bryan Pick's Suggestions for the GOP". QandO. Retrieved 12 October 2018.
  195. Rockwell, Lew (January 1990). "The Case for Paleo-libertarianism" (PDF). Liberty: 34–38. Archived from the original (PDF) on 7 September 2018.
  196. Rothbard, Murray (1992). "A Strategy for the Right". Rothbard-Rockwell Report. Retrieved 27 February 2020.
  197. Sanchez, Julian; Weigel, David. "Who Wrote Ron Paul's Newsletters?". Reason. Reason Foundation. Rothbard pointed to David Duke and Joseph McCarthy as models for an "Outreach to the Rednecks," which would fashion a broad libertarian/paleoconservative coalition by targeting the disaffected working and middle classes.
  198. Sheffield, Matthew (2 September 2016). "Where did Donald Trump get his racialized rhetoric? From libertarians". The Washington Post. Retrieved 27 February 2020.
  199. Lewis, Matt (23 August 2017). "The Insidious Libertarian-to-Alt-Right Pipeline". The Daily Beast. Retrieved 27 February 2020.
  200. Ganz, John (19 September 2017). "Libertarians have more in common with the alt-right than they want you to think". The Washington Post. Retrieved 27 February 2020.
  201. Kirby, David; Ekins, Emily (6 August 2012). "Libertarian Roots of the Tea Party". Policy Analysis (705). Cato Institute. Retrieved 27 February 2020.
  202. Berger, Edmund Berger (24 February 2017). "Looking Forward". Uncertain Futures: An Assessment of the Conditions of the Present. Zero Book. ISBN 978-1-7853-5500-4.
  203. Hoppe, Hans-Hermann (17 September 2017). Libertarianism and the Alt-Right (Speech). 12th annual meeting of the Property and Freedom Society. Bodrum, Turkey.
  204. Rothbard, Murray (January 1992). "Right-Wing Populism: A Strategy for the Paleo Movement" (PDF). RRR: 5–12. Retrieved 27 February 2020.
  205. Lansford, Tom, ed. (2014). Political Handbook of the World 2014. CQ Press. p. 1157.
  206. Papierz, Magda (8 April 2015). "Korwin-Mikke: Potrzebujemy takich przywódców jak Margaret Thatcher!" [Korwin-Mikke: We need leaders such as Margaret Thatcher!]. Najwyższy Czas! (in Polish). Retrieved 15 March 2017.
  207. Graham-Harrison, Emma (8 November 2014). "Nigel Farage's new friend in Europe: 'When women say no, they don't always mean it'". The Guardian. Retrieved 27 June 2019.
  208. Cain, Edward (1963). They'd Rather Be Right: Youth and the Conservative Movement. Macmillan. pp. 32–36. ASIN B0000CLYF9.
  209. Bader, Ralf M.; Meadowcroft, John (eds.). The Cambridge Companion to Nozick's Anarchy, State, and Utopia (2011). Cambridge University Press. p. 151.
  210. Doherty, Brian (2008). "Rothbard, Murray (1926–1995)". In Hamowy, Ronald (ed.). The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism. Thousand Oaks, Caifornia: SAGE; Cato Institute. pp. 442–445. doi:10.4135/9781412965811.n271. ISBN 978-1-4129-6580-4. LCCN 2008009151. OCLC 750831024.
  211. Cain, Edward (1963). They'd Rather Be Right: Youth and the Conservative Movement. Macmillan. pp. 32–36. ASIN B0000CLYF9.
  212. Martin, Douglas (22 November 2010). "David Nolan, 66, Is Dead; Started Libertarian Party". New York Times. Retrieved 17 November 2019.
  213. "David Nolan Reflects on the Libertarian Party on its 30th Anniversary". Colorado Freedom Report. Archived from the original on 4 March 2016.
  214. Alex Singleton (30 May 2008). "How Libertarians undermine liberty". Daily Telegraph. Archived from the original on 25 June 2009. Retrieved 10 January 2016.
  215. Staff writer (24 March 2019). "Feiglin: Palestinians in Gaza had more rights under Israel". Israel Hayom. Retrieved 26 August 2019.
  216. Harkov, Lahav (17 March 2019). "The Feiglin phenomenon". The Jerusalem Post. Retrieved 17 March 2019. The leader of the rising Zehut Party is attracting more than just young potheads to his libertarian platform
  217. "Zehut". Israel Democracy Institute. Retrieved 21 February 2019. ...and personal liberty. Its platform includes libertarian economic positions...
  218. Eglash, Ruth (4 April 2019). "A pro-pot party could tip the scales in Israel's upcoming election". The Washington Post. Retrieved 7 April 2019. Now you have two special-interest groups. What pulls them together is the strong libertarian, anti-state agenda that works well for both.
  219. "Remembering the Founder of SA Libertarianism, Dr. Marc Swanepoel".
  220. "Overview of the International Alliance of Libertarian Parties". Retrieved 26 March 2019.
  221. "Libertarian Party World Alliance Underway". 21 February 2015. Retrieved 14 June 2016.
  222. Hardy, Gunnar (17 July 2015). "Founding of the IALP". Retrieved 14 June 2016.
  223. "Members". IALP. Archived from the original on 28 January 2016. Retrieved 14 June 2016.
  224. "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 4 November 2013. Retrieved 30 October 2013.CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  225. Walsh, Jason (7 April 2006). "Libertarianism limited". The Guardian. London. Retrieved 26 February 2008.
  226. Sean Gabb, "Review by Sean Gabb of Kevin Carson's 'Organization Theory'," Libertarian Alliance: Blog (UK Libertarian Alliance, June 17, 2009).
  227. Stephen R. L. Clark, Civil Peace and Sacred Order, Limits and Renewals 1 (Oxford: Clarendon-OUP 1989).
  228. "Slaves and Citizens" and "Anarchists against the Revolution," The Political Animal: Biology, Ethics, and Politics (London: Routledge 1999).
  229. Sean Gabb, "In Defence of the British Empire," Libertarian Alliance: Blog (UK Libertarian Alliance, August 3, 2010).
  230. Gabb, "Review".
  231. Stephen R. L. Clark, The Moral Status of Animals (Oxford: Clarendon-OUP 1977).
  232. Stephen R. L. Clark, "Sexual Ontology and Group Marriage," Philosophy 58 (1983): 215-227.
  233. Clark, "Aristotle's Woman," Animal.
  234. Clark, Peace.
  235. Heppell, Timothy (June 2002). "The ideological composition of the Parliamentary Conservative Party 1992–97". British Journal of Politics and International Relations. 4 (2): 299–324. doi:10.1111/1467-856X.t01-1-00006.
  236. Raimondo, Enemy 47.
  237. See Raimondo, Enemy; Brian Doherty, Radicals for Capitalism: A Freewheeling History of the Modern American Libertarian Movement (New York: Public Affairs 2007).
  238. Raimondo, Enemy 372-83.
  239. Doherty 565-9.
  240. Murray N. Rothbard, "Left and Right: The Prospects for Liberty," Left and Right: A Journal of Libertarian Thought 1.1 (Spring 1965): 4-22.
  241. Roderick T. Long, "Rothbard's 'Left and Right': Forty Years Later" (Rothbard Memorial Lecture, Austrian Scholars Conference 2006).
  242. Raimondo, Enemy 295-9.
  243. Raimondo, Enemy 266-95.
  244. Doherty 561-5.
  245. Murray Rothbard, letter to David Bergland, June 5, 1986, qtd. Raimondo 263-4.
  246. Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. "The Case for Paleo-libertarianism" in Liberty magazine, January 1990, 34–38.
  247. Kenny Johnsson, Do You Consider Yourself a Libertarian?, interview with Lew Rockwell, May 25, 2007.
  248. Lew Rockwell (May 2, 2002). "What I Learned from Paleoism". Lew Rockwell.com. Retrieved May 2, 2002.
  249. Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Democracy: The God That Failed (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction 2001) 189.
  250. Hans-Hermann Hoppe, "My Battle With The Thought Police," Mises Daily (Mises Institute, April 12, 2005). The quoted material in the text is intended as an elaboration of an earlier discussion in Democracy; Hoppe notes that "a few sentences" of Democracy: The God that Failed address this point and writes: "In its proper context these statements are hardly more offensive than saying that the Catholic Church should excommunicate those violating its fundamental precepts or that a nudist colony should expel those insisting on wearing bathing suits." In Democracy, he suggests that, in a stateless society, it would make sense for people forming communities "for the purpose of protecting family and kin" to eschew "tolerance toward those habitually promoting lifestyles incompatible with this goal." He says that "the advocates of alternative, non-family-centered lifestyles such as, for instance, individual hedonism, parasitism, nature-environment worship, homosexuality, or communism—will have to be physically removed from society, too, if one is to maintain a libertarian order." Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Democracy: The God That Failed (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction 2001) 218.
  251. Stephan Kinsella, "Hoppe on Covenant Communities and Advocates of Alternative Lifestyles," LewRockwell.com (n.p, May 26, 2010).
  252. Walter Block, "A Libertarian Case for Free Immigration," Journal of Libertarian Studies 13.2 (Sum. 1998): 167-86.
  253. Hans-Hermann Hoppe, "Natural Order, the State, and the Immigration Problem," Journal of Libertarian Studies 16.1 (Winter 2002): 75-97.
  254. Hoppe, "Immigration" 93n23. Proponents of open borders, he maintains, "were initially drawn to libertarianism as juveniles because of its "antiauthoritarianism" (trust no authority) and seeming "tolerance," in particular toward 'alternative'—nonbourgeois—lifestyles. As adults, they have been arrested in this phase of mental development They express special 'sensitivity' in every manner of discrimination and are not inhibited in using the power of the central state to impose non-discrimination or 'civil rights' statutes on society. Consequently, by prohibiting other property owners from discrimination as they see fit, they are allowed to live at others' expense. They can indulge in their 'alternative' lifestyle without having to pay the 'normal' price for such conduct, i.e., discrimination and exclusion. To legitimize this course of action, they insist that one lifestyle is as good and acceptable as another. This leads first to multiculturalism, then to cultural relativism, and finally to 'open borders.'"
  255. Hoppe, Democracy.
  256. Edward Feser, "What Libertarianism Isn't," LewRockwell.com (n.p., Dec. 22, 2001).
  257. In 2008, Paul was reported to conclude his campaign stump "speeches with a three-part paean to individualism: 'I don't want to run your life,' 'I don't want to run the economy,' and 'I don't want to run the world.'" See Julian Sanchez and David Weigel, "Who Wrote Ron Paul's Newsletters," Reason (Reason Foundation, Jan. 16, 2008). The primary focus of the article is the ongoing controversy over the authorship of racially charged statements contained in newsletters published by Paul between around 1989 and 1994; the article cites various sources identifying Lew Rockwell as the author, as well as Rockwell's denial of authorship and his characterization of attempts to raise the issue as "hysterical smears."
  258. Ron Paul, "The Immigration Question," LewRockwell.Com (n.p., April 4, 2006). For a critique, see Block, "Libertarianism" 157.
  259. Justin Raimondo, "Confessions of an Obama Cultist," AntiWar.Com (Randolph Bourne Institute, March 8, 2008); Raimondo, Reclaiming. The openly gay Raimondo—see Justin Raimondo, In Praise of Outlaws: Rebuilding Gay Liberation (San Francisco: Students for a Libertarian Society 1979)—may be as dismissive of so-called "beltway libertarianism" as Rockwell, but he shows no signs of uncritically embracing the right-libertarianism of Hoppe and others.

Bibliography
  • Baradat, Leon P. (2015). Political Ideologies. Routledge. ISBN 978-1317345558.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
  • Bogus, Carl T. (2011). Buckley: William F. Buckley Jr. and the Rise of American Conservatism. Bloomsbury Publishing. ISBN 978-1-596-91580-0.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
  • Caplan, Bryan (2008). "Friedman, David (1945–)". In Hamowy, Ronald (ed.). The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications; Cato Institute. doi:10.4135/9781412965811.n117. ISBN 978-1412965804.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
  • Carlson, Jennifer D. (2012). "Libertarianism". In Miller, Wilburn R. (ed.). The Social History of Crime and Punishment in America. London: SAGE Publications; Cato Institute. ISBN 978-1412988766.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
  • De Leon, David (1978). The American as Anarchist: Reflections on Indigenous Radicalism. Johns Hopkins University Press.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
  • Goodway, David (2006). Anarchist Seeds Beneath the Snow: Left-Libertarian Thought and British Writers from William Morris to Colin Ward. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. ISBN 978-1846310256.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
  • Heywood, Andrew (2004). Political Theory, Third Edition: An Introduction. Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 0-333-96180-3.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
  • Kymlicka, Will (2005). "libertarianism, left-". In Honderich, Ted (ed.). The Oxford Companion to Philosophy (New ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0199264797.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
  • Long, Roderick T.; Machan, Tibor R. (2008). Anarchism/Minarchism: Is a Government Part of a Free Country?. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. ISBN 978-0-7546-6066-8.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
  • Miller, David (1987). The Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Political Thought. Wiley-Blackwell. ISBN 978-0-631-17944-3.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
  • Morris, Andrew (2008). "Anarcho-Capitalism". In Hamowy, Ronald (ed.). The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications; Cato Institute. ISBN 978-1-4129-6580-4.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
  • Newman, Saul (2010). The Politics of Postanarchism'. Edinburgh University Press. ISBN 978-0748634958.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
  • Vallentyne, Peter (2007). "Libertarianism and the State". Liberalism: Old and New: Volume 24. New York: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0521703055.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
  • Stringham, Edward (2007). Anarchy And the Law: The Political Economy of Choice. Transaction Publishers. ISBN 978-1412805797.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
  • Van de Haar, Edwin (2015). Degrees of Freedom: Liberal Political Philosophy and Ideology. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Transaction Publishers. ISBN 978-1-412-85575-4.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
  • Wündisch, Joachim (2014). Towards a Right-Libertarian Welfare State. ISBN 978-3-89785-844-2.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.